Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 142
  1. #1

    NCAA moves towards athletes getting paid


  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by bullettoothtony View Post
    Paid for endorsements. I like it. Don't make the schools pony up. Let players get market value for their own recognizance.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Major news, though we have known this would be coming for a while because the California law that takes effect in a couple years would have made it impossible for the NCAA to keep on denying athletes NLI revenues.

    The key lines in the AP story are:

    Athletes would be allowed to enter into agreements with individuals deemed to be school boosters, the person said.

    The NCAA would create a mechanism to evaluate potential deals for fair market value and spot possible corruption. An athlete could compromise their eligibility for failing to disclose details of a financial agreement or relationship, the person said.

    The recommendations also call for allowing athletes to sign autographs for money, sell their memorabilia, and be paid for personal appearances and working as an instructor in their sport.
    "Ladies and gentlemen, following the game please line up outside gate C to bid on tonight's game worn uniforms. Plus, Zion Williamson will be in the lobby signing autographs at $15 each."

    Having a mechanism to evaluate deals is the way to avoid bidding wars and boosters who just offer $500k or more to recruits. I like that.

    There will be unforeseen and unintended consequences here that we cannot know, but on this surface this looks fair and smart. I am certain Duke has been thinking extensively about this already and will have a good plan to protect the kids in our programs while also helping them to maximize their in-school earnings.

    -Jason "a deal like this might... might... make it possible for a kid to return to school rather than rush to the NBA... not for everyone but at least you would be able to make some decent money while in school" Evans
    I don't know what you are doing right now, but if you aren't listening to the DBR Podcast, you're doing it wrong.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post

    -Jason "a deal like this might... might... make it possible for a kid to return to school rather than rush to the NBA... not for everyone but at least you would be able to make some decent money while in school" Evans
    Depending on how this is implemented, there may be a few early entry players who might make as much or more in college as they would from turning pro. Kyle Guy is one potential example. If he had returned to UVA last season as an NCAA tournament hero, he would likely have been one of the most recognizable figures in college basketball. Instead, he headed to the pros where he signed a two-way contract and played a total of 4 minutes in the NBA. Now I have no idea how much he made in salary and endorsements, but I suspect that he might have been able to come close to this with endorsement money alone if he had returned to UVA.

    Cassius Stanley may be another such player if he somehow ends up with a 2-way contract instead of a full NBA contract. If he returned to Duke, he could have been a regular on ESPN's top 10 countdown. You have to think there is be a way for a Duke player to turn such exposure into serious endorsement money vs what he would get if he ends up playing mostly in the G League.

    To be clear, I hope Cassius gets drafted in the first round and makes millions. I am just pointing out that there are some guys whose endorsement value could be higher as a college star than "just another pro".

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Watching carolina Go To HELL!
    This could lessen the effect of the new G league money on star high school players. They (most) could make more from endorsements while in college than salaries in the G league. Let’s hope so.
    Ozzie, your paradigm of optimism!

    Go To Hell carolina, Go To Hell!
    9F 9F 9F
    http://www.EGLEW.com


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Sarasota, Florida
    Dissenter here. It may well happen, but that's too bad. The huge money corrupts everything, including us. In basketball, if Duke can manage to maintain its extremely high level of exposure for awhile, we will find our ability to recruit the very top talent (academic capability assumed) because the best player's market value will be stronger at Duke than, say, Missouri or Virginia Tech, let alone Creighton or Idaho. Good for some folks, but it sure won't lead to a more nearly level playing field. So great for Duke hoops, or to a lesser extent Duke lacrosse. But what's the effect on Duke football, trying to compete against Alabama, or Texas, or Ohio State? To a lesser extent, for that matter, competing against the baby blue smurfs?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    Would it be capped in any way? Or could one really deep-pocketed booster pay whatever he wanted and get a player to endorse something.

    Thatís always been my worry.

    -jk

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by -jk View Post
    Would it be capped in any way? Or could one really deep-pocketed booster pay whatever he wanted and get a player to endorse something.

    Thatís always been my worry.

    -jk
    That is the huge problem as I see it. Could legalize what Arizona, Pack and others have done recently (booster, shoe companies, whatever). Could/would we have outbid Clemson to gain the services of Zion??

    Hope this change is well thought out before instituted.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Richmond, VA

    Re-read this book

    It might be time to re-read this book.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Amateurs

    Sorry about the link to wiki but it is the only place that had a summary that was not an advertisement for the book. (Amazon etc.)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Asheville
    Quote Originally Posted by Jedweb View Post
    Dissenter here. It may well happen, but that's too bad. The huge money corrupts everything, including us. In basketball, if Duke can manage to maintain its extremely high level of exposure for awhile, we will find our ability to recruit the very top talent (academic capability assumed) because the best player's market value will be stronger at Duke than, say, Missouri or Virginia Tech, let alone Creighton or Idaho. Good for some folks, but it sure won't lead to a more nearly level playing field. So great for Duke hoops, or to a lesser extent Duke lacrosse. But what's the effect on Duke football, trying to compete against Alabama, or Texas, or Ohio State? To a lesser extent, for that matter, competing against the baby blue smurfs?
    Nothing changes here.
    "I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend."
    -Thomas Jefferson

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    Having a mechanism to evaluate deals is the way to avoid bidding wars and boosters who just offer $500k or more to recruits.
    How does a mechanism to evaluate deals avoid bidding wars? If it's a bona fide offer, ... ?

    If they're going to invent some formula that figures viewership and gate receipts based on the player skill, team TV appeal, and opponent appeal, oh my. Talk about a centrally planned economy!

    Today's Scottie Pippen at Central Arkansas (?) would get nothing.

    just a few random thoughts ... not thoroughly developed:

    This scheme just seems to cement the standing of big programs, seems like it'll impair Cinderella stories in March. Try not to forget Duke was once a Cinderella story. (more than once actually)

    It may chop the last 2x4 holding up the facade of the student athlete model. "What? An incomplete in my Wolof class? My Ni-didas check here says that you are to pass me. "

    Not to mention one's emotional connection to the team. Hired guns all? Best team money can buy?

    One fallacy I see is the notion that allowing some forms of compensation to be above-board will mean all compensation will be above board. That there won't be risks that someone will take a little more under the table to miss a free throw, make a turnover, commit a foul, etc. While some endorsement money for the former may reduce temptation to take money for the latter, it not only won't eliminate it (more is more), the latter may be more lucrative than the former.

    I'm not saying it's not just, in terms of allowing athletes the freedom to seek compensation on the basis of any other student. I'm just saying, it'll alter the experience and meaning college sports, and not for the better. So maybe it's inevitable.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Durham, NC
    The anti-corruption issues are going to be a problem. I think this is going to get the NCAA involved in a whole lot of litigation if they try to come down on someone for getting "above market value" compensation from a booster. How divorced from recruiting can this really stay? Fill the swamp.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by arnie View Post
    That is the huge problem as I see it. Could legalize what Arizona, Pack and others have done recently (booster, shoe companies, whatever). Could/would we have outbid Clemson to gain the services of Zion??

    Hope this change is well thought out before instituted.
    Yes, and that left to NCSU's meteoric rise!

  14. #14
    About time. The NCAA has been pretending that they are in the business of amateur athletics for a while now, at least for the revenue sports. If the NCAA actually was an amateur organization, there would be amateur coaches, amateur administrators, amateur sponsorship deals. Coaches aren't professors doing the job in their spare time any more, and haven't been for decades. When everyone is making millions except the players, when games are scheduled around multi-billion dollar TV broadcasts instead of classes, when players have to use the right brand of everything to not reduce the value of the numerous sponsorship contracts, you can't call it amateur athletics anymore.

    If the NCAA wanted to be amateur again, it could get rid of all of that. If there were conferences based on geography instead of TV rights, sponsorship deals only to cover operating costs, and coaches as either volunteer professors or paid normal salaries, I would accept the justification of preventing players from getting sponsorship money. But there's no way that you can morally justify cutting the players out of the money when everyone else is raking it in.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    Yes, and that left to NCSU's meteoric rise!
    Some $$$ are not spent wisely😀

  16. #16
    I like it. You aren't raiding track and field to pay basketball. You aren't bankrupting all sports by requiring payments. You are allowing players to make money off their names and faces.

  17. #17
    Pity the 10 or 11 or so poor schmucks on the team making $0.95 while the stars wallow.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I like it. You aren't raiding track and field to pay basketball.
    Was that ever a risk?

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by cspan37421 View Post
    Was that ever a risk?
    I've heard many folks ask aloud how you can pay revenue athletes, but not Olympic athletes. And other sports clearly can't afford the cost of paying players like football or basketball.

  20. #20
    This will only lead to a widening of the gap between power programs and the rest. Say goodbye to the thought of Cinderellas or Davids taking down Goliath.

    This plus eliminating transfers having to sit means the end of small schools (or heck - even schools in P5 without great name recognition) being even slightly competitive in revenue sports.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-09-2020, 08:01 PM
  2. How to Pay NCAA Revenue Athletes
    By Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 03-03-2018, 02:55 PM
  3. A way NCAA athletes could receive compensation
    By g-money in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 10-28-2013, 03:06 PM
  4. NCAA Rules: Student-Athletes and Earning
    By ElSid in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-19-2010, 05:37 PM
  5. NCAA: Serious about graduating student-athletes?
    By Verga3 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-21-2010, 10:53 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •